Che? Who? Qui?

Reason Magazine has rehashed the romantic Che Guevera myth and Volokh Conspiracy picked up on it.

Me? What do I think? I don't even want to waste a minute on Crazy Ernie  - everything must go! I made my peace with blog posts about him in the past. The guy really doesn't deserve much more than that.

Nor do I care too much for the by-product of this debate about "who has killed more people: Communism or capitalism?"

On both counts. It's a no-brainer.

But, being in search for eternal knowledge, I pose the question. Is the commie versus cappy thing a matter of semantics? Which has DIRECTLY and deliberately designed more murders?

Capitalism is predicated, in part, on innovation to maintain the means of production. It craves talent and workers. It evolves. It swings. It doesn't kill to demand conformity. To do so would be an oxymoron. It would mean suicide. Even in places where it's accused of keeping people impoverished, it won't serve its interest well in the long-run. Capitalism had distinct flavors through the centuries. Renaissance Italy, 16th century Spain, 17th century Amsterdam, 19th century Paris, 19th century Britain, 20th century America, each came with its own set of circumstances, both ruthless and otherwise, contributing to its evolution.

Is it perfect? Of course not. Is it vulnerable to man's various vices? Absolutely. But is it on the same plane as communism which demands control and re-education of independent minds?

I reckon it isn't.